conk

(redirected from conks)
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Wikipedia.

conk off

 and conk out 
1. Sl. (from years ago.) to fall asleep. I conked off about midnight. I was so tired that I nearly conked off. I was afraid I would conk out while I was driving.
2. Sl. (always conk out.) [for something] to break down; to quit running. My car conked out finally. I hope my computer doesn't conk out.
See also: conk, off

conk out

1. to stop working or fail suddenly My radio conked out again, so I couldn't hear the weather reports.
Usage notes: usually said about a machine or engine
2. to go to sleep very quickly I was so tired, I conked out on the couch and never even made it into bed.
See also: conk, out

conk out

1. Stop functioning, fail, as in The engine finally conked out. [Colloquial; early 1900s]
2. Fall asleep, as in Every evening he conked out in front of the television set. [1940s]
3. Faint or collapse, as in I don't know if it was the heat, but she suddenly conked out. [1920s]
4. Die, as in He's paranoid about conking out and he's only twenty! [Late 1920s]
See also: conk, out

conk out

v. Slang
1. To fail to function; cease to be useful, effective, or operable: My computer conked out on me. The car's engine conked out halfway through the race.
2. To go to sleep, especially due to exhaustion: I conked out after studying all night.
3. To lose consciousness or awareness: He conked out after being hit by the ball. She took some medicine and conked out.
4. To cause someone or something to lose consciousness or awareness: The ball hit the goalie's head and conked her out. The mugger conked him out and grabbed his briefcase.
See also: conk, out

conk

and konk
n. the head. Where’d you get that nasty bump on your konk?

conk off

in. to fall asleep. I conked off about midnight.
See also: conk, off

conk out

1. in. [for someone] to collapse, and perhaps fall asleep. I was so tired I just went home and conked out.
2. in. [for something] to break down; to quit running. I hope my computer doesn’t conk out.
See also: conk, out

conk-buster

and konk-buster (ˈkɔŋkbəstɚ)
1. n. inferior liquor. Jed kept a jar of conk-buster under his bed against night sweats.
2. n. a hard-to-answer question or problem. Man, what you’re asking is really a conk-buster.
References in periodicals archive ?
Another contemporaneously published analysis of section 6(c), external to the Restatement but referred to repeatedly by Conk in interpreting the meaning of that provision, is Professor Henderson's article in the Rutgers Law Review, published while the Restatement project was in progress.
This difference, like the earlier-described difference relating to the proper sources of RAD upon which plaintiffs may rely, matters a great deal to critics such as George Conk who insist that the RAD-based standard in section 2(b) should apply to all products, including prescription drugs and medical devices.
Under section 6(c), Conk argues, the blood providers would not be held liable for the resulting hepatitis, because, given that decontaminated blood was unavailable, reasonable medical providers were correct in prescribing untreated, possibly contaminated blood for hemophiliacs.
34) Thus, when Conk argues that application of the RAD-based design standard in section 2(b) would have produced different outcomes in the blood cases, from a technical standpoint, he is mixing apples with oranges.
Simply stated, the plaintiffs in the blood cases, on which Conk so heavily relies, lost because they were unable to establish through credible proof that an alternative method of decontaminating blood was reasonably available at the time of sale.
Finally, some critics suggest that the risk-utility balancing process, whether the broader version advocated by Conk and others or the Restatement's narrower version, should be avoided altogether.
Our response to Conk and other critics should be clear enough.
Conk, Is There a Design Defect in the Restatement (Third) of Torts: Products Liability?
Conk, supra note 1, at 1087-88 (stating that section 2(b) of the RESTATEMENT (THIRD), supra note 2, which provides that a product is defective in design "when the foreseeable risks of harm posed by the product could have been reduced or avoided by the adoption of a reasonable alternative design," successfully draws on risk-utility analysis).
Conk, supra note 1, at 1118; Cupp, Rethinking Conscious Design Liability, supra note 2, at 103, 105-10; Schwartz, Prescription Products, supra note 2, at 1384; Vandall, supra note 2, at 271.
See Conk, supra note 1, at 1113-14 (noting that defendants argued that they began the beat-pasteurization process as soon as they were technologically and legally able to do so).
However, even if Conk were correct that courts could fairly adjudicate a claim dealing with the availability of a process that would eliminate contaminants, it is a far cry to argue that courts should adjudicate drug design cases.
Conk, supra note 1, at 1118-19; Cupp, Rethinking Conscious Design Liability, supra note 2, at 99-103; Schwartz, Prescription Products, supra note 2, at 1384; Vandall, supra note 2, at 271-72.
See Conk, supra note 1, at 1116, 1128; Cupp, Rethinking Conscious Design Liability, supra note 2, at 103-04; Schwartz, Prescription Products, supra note 2, at 1380; see also Margaret Gilhooley, When Drugs Are Safe for Some but Not Others: The FDA Experience and Alternatives for Product Liability, 36 HOUS.